• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

The Asgard (GTS 512) Vs HeX (GTX) - Crysis Scores

8800Gt 730/1763/950
1680-1050 everything high post processing on medium this is high performance set in nvidia controls btw

ARE you sure you guys haven't changed anything are you using dx10 visuals config for xp ?
there is high performance
performance
quality
high quality we need to establish which settings everyone is on and know if you are using the dx10 visuals config for xp.

TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
==============================================================
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 42.44s, Average FPS: 47.12
Min FPS: 32.81 at frame 142, Max FPS: 60.42 at frame 1010
Average Tri/Sec: -44503516, Tri/Frame: -944449
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.97
!TimeDemo Run 1 Finished.
Play Time: 38.40s, Average FPS: 52.09
Min FPS: 32.81 at frame 142, Max FPS: 68.39 at frame 104
Average Tri/Sec: -48527576, Tri/Frame: -931620
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.98
!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 38.35s, Average FPS: 52.15
Min FPS: 32.81 at frame 142, Max FPS: 68.39 at frame 104
Average Tri/Sec: -48573448, Tri/Frame: -931454
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.98
!TimeDemo Run 3 Finished.
Play Time: 38.37s, Average FPS: 52.13
Min FPS: 32.81 at frame 142, Max FPS: 68.39 at frame 104
Average Tri/Sec: -48548528, Tri/Frame: -931338
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.98
TimeDemo Play Ended, (4 Runs Performed)
==============================================================
Press any key to continue . . .
 
Last edited:
Try again with High performance set in nvidia control panel also is it demo or full game mine is full game
 
fornowagain said:
Interesting you should start this thread I was just playing with Crysis and the new GTS.

I've kept a record of the average frames with the same setting on three cards now. Using my 24/7 settings for the cards, not flaky top end clocks with 100% fans. This GTS will go higher, around 850Mhz. The GT went to 740 before any bios mod. The GTX was happy at 660, wouldn't go to next step 675Mhz for long.

XP DX9 Crysis set to High, No AA. No mods. 1680x1050

All stock coolers (around 60%) btw, no mods.

GTX at 660/1674/2160 = 35.95
GT at 720/1782/2000 = 34.65
GTS-512 783/1944/2106 = 39.17
Click to expand...


Out of curiousity I bought a cheap GTX myself today so I could also decide myself which i think is best out of the GTS/GTX.


I think those overlcocks on the 3 cards are almost true of typical high overlocks, though I have had my hands on 2 GTX's previously and one wouldnt do over 620 and the other maxed out out on 650, and that was 3D06, so not really 24/7 stable.

My GTS has crashed running 800core on crysis after about 20 mins, Im running 775 now without any problems.

My GT was ok with a custom S1 cooler at 740 on crysis, but when I put the stock cooler back on it was well flaky, I even found problems at 620core. I was glad to see the back of the GT, seemed like a RMA waiting to happen. A friend of mine is now having the same experience.
 
Just done a run same clocks but with high quality set in control panel maybe the 169.04 are bad drivers for crysis ?
Clipboard01-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
HeX said:
Well if someone has a GTS 512 and a Q6600 they can slap at 3Ghz i'd be happy to do stock GTX benchies to compare.
Click to expand...

I will run a bench later tonight or tommorow evening, Asus card sitting here waiting to go in and appears my system specs are near on par with yours. ;)
 
Last edited:
Heres one I did at 1680*1050, All High, 8800GTX 650/1620/2052, [email protected]

Again note the higher minimum framerate, GTS is a great benching card but I'd take the 8800GTX for gaming anyday as the minimum framerate matters, as does AA performance. :)

1680t2yz6.jpg
 
Last edited:
MY BAD like a doughnut i had everything on high apart from shaders heres everything high post on medium 1680-1050
high quality set in nvidia control panel 8800gt @730/1763/950 [email protected] ghz 2 gig ram xp pro
interesting then my card at it max stable clock would match the gtx in this game without AA AF but did you have high performance or high quality in control panel ? i will post 751/1804/2002 tomoz as i flashed my card to 730/1763/950 cant be asked to install rivatuner sory for invading the thread with a GT but i thought something was odd about the results turns out i had shaders on medium.

Need everyone to say run high quality in nvidia control panel or state which setting
i take it this is with AA and Af off as well.
Clipboard01-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
All my scores are High Qual, no AA no Anniso.

When benching please everyone run DX9 path.

Also, please post what driver revision.



ebilcake what drivers are those? You score a good 4fps higher than me and your card is very similar clocks to mine.
 
HeX said:
All my scores are High Qual, no AA no Anniso.

When benching please everyone run DX9 path.
.
Click to expand...


ok, we need a standard here. :)

For anyone running XP, set driver to high quality, run crysis set graphics to optimal, it should set everything to High. quit, then run GPU benchmark.

state driver used.
 
Last edited:
why are you guys still on XP......

i suppose Vista sucks in Crysis, but anyway, i don't have XP nor do i have Vista SP1, just plan old Vista. (169.05, installed by Windows update)

1st ran was 2xAA and 2nd run is 4xAA.
6d188e7f.jpg


come on GTS players, turn up your AA and see how you perform. :P this is where GTX should shine, high level AA.

and also, average FPS means nothing if your FPS goes as low as 0, so minimum FPS is what us gamers should care about.
 
Vista sucks full stop that's why and is a lot of money unless you buy crappy oem and get 3 board changes or whatever it is.
If you upgrade regular oem is a waste of space.
 
It's not Vistas fault it's Crytek, ever noticed how the games that ran crap on Vista have always had patches for the game, not for Vista?

Why people blame Vista is beyond me, it's the games fault hence how some games run the same as they do in XP or in some cases better.
 
I just hate the fact you get three board changes or is it even tied to one board on oem ?
anyway it's simple really isn't it the OS that gives the fastest performance and the least issues people will use.
I don't see myself getting vista until i absolutely have no choice but to.
Main reason i don't like it is because it's bloated with useless stuff i don't want or need i just want a basic shell of an OS and add my own drivers tweaks and apps not have my hand held.
 
Last edited:
Surely we've established time and time again that at <1920x1200 the GT and by extension the GTS is the way to go. At 1920 x 1200 and above with AA & AF an overclocked GTX is still ahead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom